½Ð¦U¦ì¦b©M¥­®ðª^¤U°Q½×

¥ô¦ó¤Hµ¥¡A·|­û¤§¶¡¤H¨­§ðÀ»¡A¹ï¤H¤£¹ï¨Æ¡A±þµL³j¡I
If you want to critize, focus on the stuff/things done instead of personal attack.
¯d·N¡G¦¹ ban ¤H function ¥u­­ xocat II ¼i°õ¦æ.  ¦³°ÝÃD¡A½ÐÁ|³ø¡C

It is quite easy and should be commonly agreed for personal attack among users.  

Of course, we might attack somebody if he has done something wrong, but pls say what he has done wrong instead of attacking him/her.

personal attack: not equal to criticizing somebody's wrong doing.  

Therefore, it is 100% ok to mention what others' have done wrong.  However, if you just personal attack someone without mentioning the stuff he/she has done.  You're "die hard".  

§Ú­Ì¤ä«ù¨¥½×¦Û¥Ñ¡C

e.g. ABC is careless -> that's personal attack.
ABC is so careless that he put his cat into the fridge.  (with evidence support).  -> That's NOT personal attack.

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ messenger ©ó 2007-7-4 14:11 µoªí


§Ú¤S·Q°Ý: ¤H¨­§ðÀ» Personal Attack §Y ban

¬O§_¥ô¦óª©¥D³£¥i§Y ban¤H¨­§ðÀ»§O¤HªÌ?

Only xocatII can ban personal attack users.

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ ¦â§Y¬OªÅ ©ó 2007-7-4 15:01 µoªí


¤Wforum §j¤U¤ô³£¦³¤å¦rº»:sleeping:§Ú¥ò¥H¬°©Od ³¥¥u«YÅT²M´Â¦P¤å¤Æ¤j­²©Ro­Ó°}¥ý¦³o¬J²K:L:L

only personal attack without strong evidence to support claims.  In Chinese, ¹ï¤H¤£¹ï¨ÆªÌ¡C

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ coolmale9394 ©ó 2007-7-4 15:34 µoªí

¤µ ´Â o«Y ²Ä «× ¦³ ¥S §Ì ¸Ü NC ª© ª© ¥D ªÅ ¯Ê ¡A ¥ý ªð ¨Ó Ú» Ú» ¡A ­ì ¨Ó ËÝ L ¤j ÷i ....

°Ý µf ¦Û ¤v ¡A °² ¦p ¦­ oªº ª¾ ¹D ¡A ·| ­ø ·| ·f ¼L ©O ¡H çÜ ¨â çÜ À³ ¸Ó ­ø ·| ¡C ¨ä ¹ê ¨C ¤é ³£ ·|  ...

if you're batman, what will you do?
Tell me here or preferably through PM.

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ sausau ©ó 2007-7-4 15:52 µoªí
«¢¡IÉA³¥¥s°µ  Personal Attack  §r¡H©w¸q©O¡H­ø¦h©ú¡H

§A¥ý­n©w¥ß¤@®M²M·¡¦X²z³W¨Ò¥ý¥i¥H¥Î  ( Personal Attack  ) ©O­Ó¦r²´¡I


Forum  <===========  ¤¤¤å¥s°µ ( ½×¾Â ) ¡A·Q§A·|ª¾¡A¹ï¶Ü¡I


¥Ñ§A ...

It is quite easy and should be commonly agreed for personal attack among users.  

Of course, we might attack somebody if he has done something wrong, but pls say what he has done wrong instead of attack him/her.

¹ï¤H¤£¹ï¨ÆªÌ¡A±þ¡C

this is already a culture in other competitors's websites that mentioning is not so good.  

personal attack: not equal to critiziing somebody's wrong doing.

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ brasco ©ó 2007-7-4 16:09 µoªí

¦ý§Ú¥ç¨£­ø¨ì§A¹ï¤j®aûHcomplaint§@¹L¥ô¦ó¿n·¥¦P¦³«Ø³]©ÊûH¦^À³,
¤Ï¤§ÀsÃC¤@®¤, ±þµL³j!!

PM me for your suggestions.  Elaborate your thinking.

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ loksiu ©ó 2007-7-4 16:15 µoªí

allure, apeapeape, mtr, dizzc..... µ¥³£´¿¤½¶}©Î¥Hpm§Î¦¡§@¥X¸ß°Ý, ¦ý§¹¥þ¨S¦³¥ô¦ó¦^À³.

That's something you said without evidence support.  I reply every PM.

¤Þ¥Î:

­ì©«¥Ñ ©}¦Ú¤ó ©ó 2007-7-4 16:15 µoªí
Questions:

1. If members appeal against your decision, how did they intend to appeal the verdict??

2. Will you be tended to subjective by receiving PART of members' private mail before KILLING??

1. I've modified my rules/definition of personal attack.  So, over 92.3% of my banning is ok.  
They can just email me or login as a new member if they insist for not banning.  Very easy.  

2. I repeat, personal attack is defined quite well in my post.  Pls read it.  If you want to modify the definition, PM me.  So, it won't be subjective.  

©O«×­ø«Yªk®x¡A­ø»Ý­nÃÒ¾Ú¡A§Ú¹ï²´´N«YÃÒ¾Ú! (Á¿¯º©Q, ¨ä¹ê¡A¤j®aªº²´´N«}«Y evidence °Õ)